DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species 7 (Fig. 10), Claims 1-13 and 17-19 in the reply filed on 4/14/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 14-16 and 20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected species (Species 2-4, 6), there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 9, 11, 13, and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hanafusa (US 20200232715 A1).
As to claim 1, Hanafusa discloses: A heat sink (Fig. 3-5), comprising:
a base portion 10 to which a heat-generating element 102 is thermally connected;
a radiating fin 20 provided on a front surface 11 of the base portion;
a heat pipe 50 that is provided in an internal space 15 of the base portion and stretches in a planar direction (longitudinally) of the base portion; and
a sealing member 51 (resin; par. 0064) that is provided in the internal space of the base portion so as to face an end portion of the heat pipe in a longitudinal direction and seals the internal space of the base portion.
As to claim 3, Hanafusa discloses: wherein the internal space of the base portion is a hole portion 15 (see Fig. 5) that extends in the planar direction of the base portion, and the heat pipe is inserted into the hole portion.
As to claim 9, Hanafusa discloses: wherein a material of the base portion is different from a material of a container of the heat pipe (at least a different piece of material, since the heat pipe and its tube/container is selectively mounted in the through hole – the base portion and heat pipe are not formed integrally; par. 0060).
As to claim 11, Hanafusa discloses: wherein a protruding part 20, 30 is provided on the front surface 11 of the base portion.
As to claim 13, Hanafusa discloses: wherein the heat pipe has a section that stretches in a planar direction (longitudinally) of the radiating fin.
As to claim 17, Hanafusa discloses: wherein a ratio of a dimension of the heat pipe in a radial direction to a thickness of the base portion is 0.009 or more and 0.800 or less (2/3 or less; par. 0073).
As to claim 18, Hanafusa discloses: wherein a thickness of the base portion is 8.0 mm or more and 500 mm or less (through hole 15 is 5-50 mm, base portion thickness in width or height is greater than 5-50 mm; see par. 0048, 0073).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 8 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hanafusa (US 20200232715 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Li (US 6148906 A).
As to claim 8, Hanafusa does not disclose:
wherein the heat pipe is fixed to the internal space of the base portion by plastically deforming the base portion.
Li discloses:
wherein the heat pipe 30, 31 (Fig. 2-4) is fixed to the internal space of the base portion by plastically deforming the base portion 32, 34 (press bonding; col. 4, lines 24-29);
in order to bond the base portion together and bond the heat pipe(s) to the base portion (col. 4, lines 24-29).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the related art(s) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Hanafusa as suggested by Li, e.g., providing:
wherein the heat pipe is fixed to the internal space of the base portion by plastically deforming the base portion;
in order to bond the base portion together and bond the heat pipe(s) to the base portion.
Additionally, all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined/modified the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination/modification would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.___, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
As to claim 10, Hanafusa does not disclose:
wherein the sealing member is metal, and a material of the sealing member is in common with a material of the base portion.
However, Li discloses:
wherein the sealing member is metal 34 (Fig. 2-4; col. 4, lines 24-29), and a material of the sealing member is in common with a material of the base portion 34, 32;
in order to bond the base portion together and bond the heat pipe(s) to the base portion (col. 4, lines 24-29).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the related art(s) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Hanafusa as suggested by Li, e.g., providing:
wherein the sealing member is metal, and a material of the sealing member is in common with a material of the base portion;
in order to bond the base portion together and bond the heat pipe(s) to the base portion.
Additionally, all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined/modified the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination/modification would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.___, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hanafusa (US 20200232715 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Noda (US 20030178181 A1).
As to claim 19, Hanafusa does not disclose: further having a region in which a fin pitch of a plurality of the radiating fins provided on the front surface of the base portion differs.
Noda discloses: further having a region (corresponding to integral fins 13; Fig. 5) in which a fin pitch of a plurality of the radiating fins provided on the front surface of the base portion differs (differs from thin fins 14);
in order to provide integral and attached fins, thick and thin fins, fins of different materials (par. 0049-0055), and/or in order to reduce difference of temperature both in the base plate and the heat dissipating fins (par. 0063).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the related art(s) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Hanafusa as suggested by Noda, e.g., providing:
further having a region in which a fin pitch of a plurality of the radiating fins provided on the front surface of the base portion differs;
in order to provide integral and attached fins, thick and thin fins, fins of different materials, and/or in order to reduce difference of temperature both in the base plate and the heat dissipating fins.
Additionally, all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined/modified the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination/modification would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.___, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 4-7, and 12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As to claims 2, 4-7, and 12, the allowability resides in the overall structure and functionality of the apparatus as recited in the dependent claim 2, including all of the limitations of their base claims and intervening claims, and at least in part, because they recite the following limitations:
2. (Original) The heat sink according to claim 1, wherein a resin material is further interposed between the end portion of the heat pipe in the longitudinal direction and the sealing member.
Meyer (US 5826645 A), Chen (US 20050155746 A1), and Watanabe (US 20210010761 A1) disclose conventional heat sink assemblies.
None of the prior art, either alone or in combination, can be reasonably construed as adequately teaching the above claimed elements, in combination with the remaining claim limitations.
Further, Examiner has not identified any double patenting issues.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB R CRUM whose telephone number is (571)270-7665. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jayprakash Gandhi can be reached on (571) 272-3740. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JACOB R CRUM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights